The operating system's group at Technische Universitšt Dresden is pleased to announce the release of version 1.2 of the Fiasco L4 microkernel. This release fixes many bugs, a few features have been added as well. For a list of changes please consult the CHANGES file. Get the package from the download directory or from CVS. Refer to the README file for further information.

If I understand correctly, L4 is the standard API which the kernel must implement in order to be an L4 kernel. So, you implement the L4 API and you end up with an L4 kernel - such as the fiasco microkernel.

Are the underlying workings of the kernel not that important, just so long as the API is implemented?

Also, are there examples of systems using an L4 microkernel in production or in various operating systems? Perhaps some projects underway?

If I understand correctly, L4 is the standard API which the kernel must implement in order to be an L4 kernel.

No. L4 is a family of similar nanokernels, but they're not all the same.

So, you implement the L4 API and you end up with an L4 kernel - such as the fiasco microkernel.

You implement to the reference API (e.g. Fiasco, Hazelnut, now Pistaschio). From what I understand, most of the code is machine-dependant (the PPC code looks nothing like the IA32 code). But! It's not very big, so this isn't that important.

Also, are there examples of systems using an L4 microkernel in production or in various operating systems? Perhaps some projects underway?

all work had migrated on the Pistachio kernel
it's very interesting to know that the Fiasco microkernel (which afaik should have real time capabilities instead of the other kernels , more general purpose) is still in development

I'm beginning to think that the "cooler" the name of the project, the less useful it is. The projects that have the coolest names (I won't name names), seem to be the ones that never reach a working state...

The projects that have the coolest names (I won't name names), seem to be the ones that never reach a working state...

Like what? Ubuntu? Sarge? Chicago? All of those are in a working state (Well, I don't know if you could call Win9x, Chicago, in a working state. :-) ) I think it would actually be hard to find an OS without a cool name, even from commercial developers. :-)